The Humanists Influence on Cultural and Religious Development - Research Paper Example

The Humanists’ Influence on Cultural and Religious Development By critically evaluating the works and treatises produced by the humanists, it becomes evident that the humanist writers, philosophers and intellectuals have rendered worthwhile services in the cultural and religious developments of human societies by infusing spiritual thoughtfulness and significance of moral values in them. Since philosophers appear to be the rebels of the social establishment, and intend to bring revolutionary reforms in the world, they firmly stand against the prevailing perversion and deviancy from the true religious teachings and traditional norms. The intellectuals not only lament over the pathetic moral decline of their fellow beings, but also strive to make corrections in the individual and collective life of the masses through their verbal or written preaching. Consequently, an overwhelming majority of the general public belonging to their contemporary society turns against the philosophers by declaring them breakers of law and traditions. However, they remain as firm as rock in the face of hardships, and stick to showing the people the very path of glory and wisdom. This state of affairs is not confined to one social establishment only; rather, the humanists have left indelible impact of their broad and humane thoughtfulness on every cultural set up of the globe without discrimination. The present paper aims to throw light on the valuable services of the philosophers and writers with special reference to the works created by celebrated 14th century Italian writer, poet and reformer Giovanni Boccaccio and 15th century Dutch writer Desiderius Erasmus. Boccaccio’s allegorical work The Decameron serves as a great satire on the malpractices and hypocrisy existing in his contemporary Italian culture. Through his simple but thought-provoking short fables and tales, he censures the avaricious and condemnable nature of the clergymen, who sell the word of the Scriptures for their own purpose. The priests, parsons and other churchmen, as the tales view, are considered to be the noblest, holiest and most reliable individuals, who are administering the spiritual and social activities by inviting the people towards the way of God. However, instead of fulfilling their sacred mission of guiding the masses, they are misguiding them by offering the permission to enter the paradise. Since the Lord has not bestowed upon the priests the power to make false promises in respect of granting permission to enter the heavens, the act of such barter for pecuniary gains on the part of the priests is actually a burdensome sin in its real sense. Such a condemnable act, is not only strictly against the basic Christian teachings and mythology, but also serves as an infamous blur on the very face of the perverted clergy. Somehow, the same had been in vogue for the last many decades before the Boccaccio’s era; it is therefore he has discussed the same in his Decameron. The first tale of the treatise narrates how innocent people are exploited by the purported holy men in the sacred name of religion. The writer depicts the character of the wicked men, called Ciapelletto, who led a life full of sin, debauchery and dissipation, but had a vehemently peaceful and tranquil death after making confession in front of the priest. The priest not only pardoned him for all his past malpractices and misdeeds, but also declared the dying affluent trader a thoroughly pure man. Since Ciapelletto had died in a town far from his native land, the indigenous population was not aware of his filthy character. Consequently, the future generations of the town he died started calling him as a person worthy to be followed for leading a pious, humble and virtuous life. Eventually, the wicked Ciapelletto got the status equivalent to a saint, and turned out to be the spiritual guide for humanity. Hence, the reformist has skilfully mocked at the injustices and cruelties being adopted by the religious stratum just for the pursuit of pecuniary gains and financial benefits. Boccaccio points out how abundance of money and resources change the very norms, values and beliefs of the people, where no one bothers to explore the truth had been concealed under the pile of falsehood, deceit and misrepresentation. The humanist under-analysis does not confine the violation of religious teachings and social traditions to religious stratum only; rather, he also views the nobility and general public as the shareholders in the observing of malpractices, dishonesty and corruption in one way or the other. Boccaccio narrates, through the mouth of one of his characters, Dioneo, the tale of two churchmen, including monk and abbot, both of whom had developed secret illicit relationships with a girl in the church premises, and used to call her time and again for their purpose. Hence, apparently, they were leading the life of a recluse without even entering into marital-knot like other people; but in real life, they had been involved into debauchery and fornication, which was one of the most condemnable act according to the Holy Scriptures. Boccaccio aims to define that the churchmen should not be prohibited from getting married provided it is a natural human desire, which requires an adequate way for the fulfilment of the same according to the noble teachings of the Holy Christ. The most imperative point raised by the reformist humanist is this that the abbot exploits the monk by blackmailing him regarding having acquaintance with his relationship with the girl, and subsequently himself gets involves into the monk’s girlfriend to satisfy his carnal desires. Thus the tale serves as a great satire on the declining moral and social values of the era, where the people had refused to follow the bright teachings of Christianity. Boccaccio has also narrated the moral condition of the nobility, where the Friars, vicars and dukes used to spend a life full of revelries and fornication. The reformer has shown how one duke seduced the wife of the other, and the same was the situation with the wives and daughters of the elite stratum of society. The humanist reformer explains how the royalty used its daughters for developing relations with the big powers of the world, as the seventh tale of Day II reveals that the Sultan of Babylon inspires his daughter to capture the attention and love of the King of Algrave so that the Babylon could find a strong ally in the person of the King. However, the girl was captured by nine different men and spent time with them. Even then, she pretended to be virgin before the King and thus got married to him. Thus, the writer, in a very satirical manner, describes the character of the royalty and the persons enjoying the royal status on the foundations of filth, deceit and misrepresentation. The critics also view the Boccaccio’s work as one of the most dominant factors behind creating awareness among the masses. As a result, the educated stratum rebelled against the violation of the religious rites at the hands of the clergy. Martin Luther appears to be the greatest rebel, who openly announced the malpractices being exercised by the corrupt and wicked nobility and church administrators. Consequently, he vehemently denounced the supremacy of the Catholic Church that maintains one and the only aim of obtaining more and more power, pelf and possession from the people and hence letting them go astray from the right path of glory. In his second theologian treaty, “On the Babylonish Captivity of the Church” (1520), Lutherexpresses his disgust for the notion of sacrament decreed by the Pope, which seeks no roots in the Christ’s sacred teachings. Though the addressees appear to be the German Nobility, yet it is also meant for the Pope and Christian community at large. (Johnston, 1992) In a simple, but modest and logical tone , Luther reprimands the sacrament proclamation, and has declared it vehemently against the original religious belief of Christianity. The same can be witnessed in the tales narrated by Boccaccio in his Decameron. Boccaccio was not alone in his fight against the existing social evils of his culture; on the other hand, there exists a class of humanists to indicate the immorality observed by all strata of society; Erasmus was also among these reformists and humanists. Illustrious Renaissance era thinker and writer Erasmus has ridiculed the clergy’s reverting from the true teachings of Christ, in his Praise of Folly where the clergy had absorbed itself into worldly pursuits, instead of paying due heed to their main obligation they are supposed to observe. The protagonist-cum-narrator of the work i.e. More or Folly ironically admires the stupid and selfish activities of the nobility and clergy and presents his heartiest congratulations for performing the same, which is actually condemnation of their faults and follies being exercised in a satirical manner. The narrator declares the selfish attempts being made by the people as an act worthy of praise and encouragement, whereas wise, prudent and selfless efforts are just the foolishness on the part of the performer. Thus, the writer in a humorous manner mocks at the mistakes being made by both the most influential strata of society through the mouth of his character Folly. Folly’s declaring himself as the benefactor of mankind contains iron in it. The writer seems to exclaim that since the so called wise and prudent are busy in violating the very principles of morality, wisdom and foresight, there would be a harmless advisor and benefactor in the person of an idiot called Folly, who has been nursed by the ignorance and intoxication. Written in a very pleasant and light tone throughout, the writer has pointed out the most sensitive issues that appeared to be quite opposite to the Christian thought. Being the spiritual leader of society, the priests were expected to be humble, modest, charitable and contented in their everyday life. The masses looked at them for guidance in religious and social matters, and considered them to be compassionate and kind towards them. However, instead of pretending spiritually superior and judicious, they looked running amuck in the pursuit of pelf, power and possession to lead a peaceful and luxurious life. They used to issue religious decrees just for their personal gains, and called it as the word of Scriptures. Hence, they misused their knowledge about the book of God, and their decrees used to be either for the benefit of the royalty or for their personal cause. According to Folly they reckon it one of the main points of piety if they are so illiterate that they can’t so much as read; and then when they run over their offices, which they carry about them, rather by tale than understanding, they believe the gods more than ordinarily pleased with their braying. Hence, they are just loyal to their bread and butter instead of being caring and sacrificing towards the masses at large. Consequently, the church witnessed its spiritual downfall and the people started looking at it with great distrust and suspicion, which put its position at grave jeopardy at the hands of the opportunist religious persons and office-bearers of the church. At this precarious state of affairs, intellectuals and thinkers rose to the occasion for the rescue of the masses from the exploitation being made at the hands of the nobility and clergy. Folly also mocks at the rigid attitude of the so called orthodox clergy, which violates every doctrine attributed to Holy Christ, as Folly says that that among these there are some so rigidly religious that their upper garment is haircloth, their inner of the finest linen; and, on the contrary, others wear linen without and hair next their skins. Others, again, are as afraid to touch money as poison, and yet neither does forbear wine nor dallying with women. The work under examination proves the very fact that the writer has not expressed superficial ideas and notions in his work, which he narrates through the mouth of his narrator. On the other hand, he has cited the traditions and customs prevailing in the ancient Greek and Roman societies, where the traders and merchant enjoyed higher status and privileges in comparison with the poor philosophers including Socrates, Plato and others. The jester Folly cites the Biblical statements and stories in the support of his arguments, which reveals how Folly appreciates the priests on feeling happy even putting aside the true spirit of Christianity, particularly their act of granting pardon as well as the permission for entering the heavens against the fee or charity they pay to the church for salvation. Erasmus has reiterated the very notion that the offering of prayers, keeping fasts and doing such apparently virtuous deeds meant nothing to the Lord and Christ, provided these activities do not benefit the creatures of God. Hence, these snobbish pious would be unable to win his approval on the Day of Judgment, and hence will be treated as per the hypocrite Jews. Erasmus states that the Christ, interrupting them (i.e. the proud and avaricious priests) in their vanities, which otherwise were endless, will ask them, "Whence this new kind of Jews? I acknowledge one commandment, which is truly mine, of which alone I hear nothing. (Book I) Folly’s declaring himself as the benefactor of mankind contains irony in it. The writer seems to exclaim that since the so called wise and prudent are busy in violating the very principles of morality, wisdom and foresight, there would be a harmless advisor and benefactor in the person of an idiot called Folly, who has been nursed by the ignorance and intoxication. Folly also censures the society for confining the women’s role in society, which makes him the pioneer to demand for equal rights and respectable of women in society. Thus, Erasmus intends to bring social reforms in his environment by eliminating social and moral evils including pride, portentousness, ravenousness, arrogance, show-off and hypocrisy. It is his teachings that encouraged the future generations to raise revolt against the existing injustices, inequalities, exploitations and malpractices. World famous reformer Martin Luther also sought inspirations from the writings of this great humanist reformist. His addresses to the German Royalty, nobility and clergy reveal that he had obtained inspiration from the teachings of his Dutch predecessor Desiderius Erasmus. It is supposed that the great reformer and founder of Lutheran doctrine i.e. Martin Luther was also inspired by work produced by the Erasmus. Consequently, he challenged the elite stratum of German society through his first address to the German Nobility in 1520, where he laid stress upon them to introduce reforms in order to grant equal status to all the people of God. Thus, his Address to the German Nobility serves as a remarkable document, which was presented in the royal court as the first indication of revolting against the man-made Christian doctrine. The document was first presented in the form of an open letter to the elite stratum of Germany, where Martin took the plea that since all true followers of Jesus Christ are spiritual; the Pope has no right to apply demarcation between the clergy and common people by calling the previous as spiritual and the later as temporal ones. The treatise censures the clergy in the same manner as Erasmus has made fun of the churchmen in his praise of Folly. Lutheran work deals with the entire Christian community, where he looks making his claim in the light of the Christian teachings manifestly elaborated in the Scriptures, with authentic citations and references. (Randell, 2008) The Lutheran doctrine proved the turning point in the Christian history, and laid indelible impact on the entire religious belief system for the future centuries to come. In a nutshell, both Boccaccio and Erasmus have produced vehemently valuable works in the benefit of the humanity, which strive for the implication of social justice, equality, morality, fair-play and decency. The authors unveil the hypocrisy that had become the essential part of the everyday life of the royal and religious strata of their society. The author has raised an imperative issue, in a satirical manner, on the basis of absolute objectivity without any personal grudge or malice for anyone. Targeting the malpractices being exercised in the sacred places like church and temples, and criticism of the priests for working just for the interest of the king makes the works sublime in nature and scope. The same was imitated by the Luther, in the light of the words produced by Boccaccio and Erasmus, which also state the same that neither church nor royalty has any right to inflict any kind of injustice on the people, and all the followers of Christ must be dealt with on the golden principle of equality and fair play. Works Cited Boccaccio, Giovanni. “The Decameron” Penguin Publishers London 1972 Retrieved from http://biblioteca.vitanet.cl/colecciones/800/850/853/decameron.pdf Erasmus, Desiderius. “Praise of Folly” Pal Halsall 1998 Retrieved from http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/1509erasmus-folly.html Johnston, Andrew. “Progress of Reform-The Protestant Reformation in Europe” Longman Publishing Company 1992 Randell, Keith. “Luther’s Teachings: Luther and German Reformation” 1517-1555 Hodder Education Publishers 2008 Read More